Audit-Staff Scheduling by Column Generation

  • Andreas Drexl
  • Johannes Frahm
  • Frank Salewski


When scheduling its audit-staff, the management of an auditing firm encompasses a number of decisions. These may be grouped into several categories which differ markedly in terms of organizational echelon involved, length of the planning horizon and the planning periods, degree of aggregation of the audit tasks, degree of detail of the required information, and decision objective. However, traditional audit-staff scheduling models (Balachandran and Zoltners 1981, Chan and Dodin 1986, Gardner et al. 1990, Dodin and Chan 1991, Drexl 1991, Dodin and Elimam 1997, Dodin et al. 1998, Brucker and Schumacher 1999, Rolland et al. 2005) are single-level models which try to construct a direct assignment of auditors to tasks and periods. To facilitate algorithmic treatment, all these models are more or less gross simplifications of practical planning situations.


Tabu Search Planning Horizon Column Generation Master Problem Project Schedule 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    Alvarez-Valdés R, Tamarit JM (1989) Heuristic algorithms for resource-constrained project scheduling: A review and an empirical analysis. In: Slowinski R, Weglarz J (eds.) Advances in Project Scheduling, Amsterdam, pp. 113–134Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Badiru AB (1988) Towards the standardization of performance measures for project scheduling heuristics. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 35:82–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Balachandran BV, Zoltners AA (1981) An interactive audit-staff scheduling decision support system. The Accounting Review 56:801–812Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Barnhart C, Johnson EL, Nemhauser GL, Savelsbergh MWP, Vance PH (1998) Branch-and-price: column generation for huge integer programs. Operations Research 46:316–329Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Bartusch M, Möhring RH, Radermacher FJ (1988) Scheduling project networks with resource constraints and time windows. Annals of Operations Research 16:201–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Bixby N, Boyd E (1996) Using the CPLEX Callable Library, CPLEX Optimization Inc, 7710-T Cherry Park, HoustonGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Bradley SP, Hax AC, Magnanti TL (1977) Applied Mathematical Programming. Addison-Wesley, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Brucker P, Drexl A, Möhring RH, Neumann K, Pesch E (1999) Resource-constrained project scheduling: Notation, classification, models, and methods. European Journal of Operational Research 112:3–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Brucker P, Schumacher D (1999) A new tabu search procedure for an audit-scheduling problem. Journal of Scheduling 2:157–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Chan KH, Dodin B (1986) A decision support system for audit-staff scheduling with precedence constraints and due dates. The Accounting Review 61:726–733Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Dodin B, Chan KH (1991) Application of production scheduling methods to external and internal audit scheduling. European Journal of Operational Research 52:267–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Dodin B, Elimam AA (1997) Audit scheduling with overlapping activities and sequence dependent setup costs. European Journal of Operational Research 97:22–33 [Erratum in European Journal of Operational Research 104 (1998) 262–264]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    Dodin B, Elimam AA, Rolland E (1998) Tabu search in audit scheduling. European Journal of Operational Research 106:373–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    Drexl A (1991) Scheduling of project networks by job assignment. Management Science 37:1590–1602Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Fourer R, Gay DM, Kernighan BW (1993) AMPL — A Modelling Language for Mathematical Programming, The Scientific Press, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Gardner JC, Huefner RJ, Lofti V (1990) A multiperiod audit staff planning model using multiple objectives: development and evaluation. Decision Sciences 21:154–170Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Kolisch R, Sprecher A, Drexl A (1995) Characterization and generation of a general class of resource-constrained project scheduling problems. Management Science 41:1693–1703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    Neumann K, Morlock M (2002) Operations Research, 2nd edition. Hanser, München, WienGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    Neumann K, Schwindt C, Zimmermann J (2003) Project Scheduling With Time Windows and Scarce Resources, 2nd edition. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    Pritsker AAA, Watters WD, Wolfe PM (1969) Multiproject scheduling with limited resources: A zero-one programming approach. Management Science 41:93–108Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    Rolland E, Patterson RA, Ward K, Dodin B (2005) Scheduling differentially-skilled staff to multiple projects with severe deadlines. European Journal of Operational Research (to appear)Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    Salewski F (1995) Hierarchische Personaleinsatzplanung in Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaften. Physica, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    Salewski F (1996) Tabu search algorithms for project scheduling under resource and mode identity constraints. IFORS 14th Triennial Meeting, Vancouver, July 9Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    Salewski F, Drexl A (1993) Personaleinsatzplanung in Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaften — Bestandsaufnahme und konzeptioneller Ansatz. Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft 63:1357–1376Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    Salewski F, Schirmer A, Drexl A (1997) Project scheduling under resource and mode identity constraints: Model, complexity, methods, and application. European Journal of Operational Research 102:88–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. [26]
    Vanderbeck F (2000) On Dantzig-Wolfe decomposition in integer programming and ways to perform branching in a branch-and-price algorithm. Operations Research 48:111–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Deutscher Universitäts-Verlag/GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andreas Drexl
    • 1
  • Johannes Frahm
    • 2
  • Frank Salewski
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für BetriebswirtschaftslehreChristian-Albrechts-Universität zu KielKiel
  2. 2.Vattenfall Europe Information Services GmbHHamburg

Personalised recommendations